The Dictatorship
The antitrust scandals brewing inside Trump’s DOJ
This is an adapted excerpt from the March 29 episode of “Velshi.”
An investigation into a scandal within Donald Trump’s administration, which has largely flown under the radar, now appears ready to break open into a Watergate-level crisis for the president.
While it’s tempting to recall Watergate as being triggered by a break-in, it actually had its roots in an antitrust scandal — and in a thread that two lawmakers refused to stop pulling on.
In the early 1970s, the Nixon administration stood accused of interfering in a Justice Department case against International Telephone and Telegraphor ITT, which was a conglomerate that controlled telecom, hotels, defense contracts and plenty of other things.
The allegation at the center of the scandal was that the Justice Department went easy on ITT’s antitrust case in exchange for corporate funding of the 1972 Republican National Convention.
A Texas Democrat named Wright Patman, then chair of the House Banking Committee, tried to investigate. But he was blocked by members of his own party, who called it too risky to do in an election year.
So Patman passed the information to Democratic Sen. Sam Ervin of North Carolina, and an investigation followed. Piece by piece, the scandal came into focus.
Davis helped pick the referees, then showed up to play the game.
The ITT antitrust case may seem obscure today, but it revealed the administration’s willingness to bend rules for political and corporate gain, setting the stage for the Watergate break-in, which is the part of the scandal most Americans remember.
As investigators began digging into these financial and political connections, Richard Nixon’s campaign grew increasingly paranoid about leaks and opposition research. That fear and suspicion led to the infamous break-in at the Democratic National Committee headquarters in the Watergate complex, and it triggered the historic investigations that forced a sitting president to resign just two years later.
That history matters today, especially considering what The Wall Street Journal has uncovered inside the current Justice Department — which may be the Trump administration’s first antitrust domino to fall.
In an investigation that involved interviews with more than three dozen Justice Department employees, lobbyists, lawyers and others familiar with the antitrust division, the Journal describes a scandal that “casts a shadow over the Justice Department’s integrity” and “has alarmed even some Trump loyalists in the department.”
The man at the center of it is Mike Davis. After the FBI search of Mar-a-Lago, Davis became one of Trump’s most aggressive public defenders, making thousands of media appearances and positioning himself as a top outside legal ally, since he was not officially part of the president’s team.
Trump rewarded that loyalty publiclycalling Davis “tough as hell” on the campaign trail and saying he was someone he wanted in a “very high capacity.”
After the election, Davis helped recommend key figures to lead antitrust enforcement inside the administration, including Gail Slater, whom Trump nominated as assistant attorney general to run the Justice Department’s Antitrust Division.
Then, by his own account, Davis turned around and bragged to the same officials he had helped install that corporate clients were “beating his door down” because of his amazing White House access, according to the Journal.
Davis helped pick the referees, then showed up to play the game.
Under Trump, lobbyists who once thrived behind the scenes now openly tout their connections and wins.
Former Federal Trade Commission Chairman William Kovacic, who was appointed by President George W. Bush, told the Journal that Davis is “the face of this movement.” In previous administrations, Kovacic noted, “You would never want to be seen holding the knife.”
Last year, lawyers from the Justice Department’s antitrust division tried to block a $14 billion merger of Hewlett Packard Enterprise and Juniper Networksarguing that it would reduce competition in a critical tech sector. They pushed for the merged company to sell off key assets so it would be less concentrated and market-dominating.
That’s how antitrust enforcement is supposed to work.
But according to a sworn deposition from Justice Department official Roger Alford, during this process, Davis, who was hired by Hewlett Packard, interfered and told Slater, whom he helped install in the administration, “If you don’t approve this settlement, I will destroy you. I will destroy your job at the DOJ.”
While Davis denies that conversation, and told the Journal it was “utter bulls–––,” Slater was shaken enough to report the call immediately, according to Alford.
When the Justice Department’s career lawyers tried to block the Hewlett Packard-Juniper merger to protect competition, the companies’ lawyers didn’t negotiate on the merits, as would normally happen.
Instead, they went over the heads of agency staff, allegedly appealing directly to Trump-appointed leadership and using back-channel outreach to senior department officials, according to the Journal.
The judge called it “unacceptable” and said it showed “absolute disrespect for the court, for the jury, for this entire process.”
According to people familiar with the matter, even as Slater instructed the company that “no more lobbyists” should be involved in the process, a directive meant to stop outside influence, Davis was allegedly already meeting privately with top officials behind the scenes — bypassing the very people responsible for enforcing the law, the Journal reports.
A Justice Department official denied that the antitrust division was cut out of talks. A spokesman for Hewlett Packard told the Journal that the company appealed to senior leadership at the department because they believed antitrust officials were not giving proper consideration to national-security issues.
Then came one of the most extraordinary moments in this whole story. People familiar with the matter told the Journal that a senior DOJ official walked into Slater’s office and placed a settlement term sheet on her desk — written by Hewlett Packard’s own lawyers.
When Slater asked her superior what would happen if she refused to sign, he reportedly told her he would fire her deputies. The next day, the deal was announced.
Weeks later, her deputies were terminated, and months after that, Slater, the person Davis himself helped install and then allegedly threatened, was out of the department.
Davis pushed for her removal and celebrated it publicly in more than a dozen posts on X. In his own deposition, he acknowledged recommending her firing to “anyone who would listen.”
As for the deputies’ firings, Davis told the Journal he pushed for their termination because they made “bogus” allegations of corruption against him, not because of the merger deal.
Notably, the case is far from over; several state attorneys general refused to join the settlement and are continuing the fight.
After Watergate, Congress passed something called the Tunney Act to prevent exactly this kind of corruption, requiring parties to disclose meetings, contacts and communications. But investigators say key meetings with lobbyists were never disclosed, back-channel contacts were left off official records, and text messages involving Davis were never produced.
In a separate merger, involving real estate giant Compassantitrust enforcers called for a deeper investigation, then the company hired Davis to help push the acquisition.
According to the Journal’s reporting, Compass wanted to avoid a “second request,” a routine part of antitrust enforcement in which an agency asks for more information to decide whether to block or approve a deal. Slater wanted one, but she was overruled and the deal went through, right in the middle of a national housing crisis.
Then came the case you may know, even if you didn’t know this backstory: Live Nation Entertainment and its ticketing arm, Ticketmaster. The company has been accused of using its dominance over concerts, venues and ticketing to crush competition and drive up prices.
The government argued that Live Nation controls roughly half the concert promotion market, and court filings describe internal company conversations about how “stupid” their customers were and how they were “robbing them blind.”
The antitrust staff at the DOJ were actively litigating this case in federal court when suddenly a settlement appeared, negotiated above their heads.
Antitrust regulators were completely shut out of the process — not once, not twice, but throughout, according to reporting by The Wall Street Journal and Matt Stollerresearch director at the American Economic Liberties Project and one of the country’s sharpest outside analysts of antitrust and monopoly power.
People familiar with the conversations told the Journal that Trump was personally calling aides, asking why the case hadn’t been settled. The Journal reported that Trump heard about the case from Ari Emanuel, Hollywood superagent and former Live Nation board member, who reportedly urged the president to resolve it.
According to the Journal, on March 5, Trump hosted a controversial White House meeting with Live Nation CEO Michael Rapino, Attorney General Pam Bondi and Slater’s acting replacement. The same day, the settlement was signed and the company avoided a breakup.
Critics called the outcome an effective “corporate pardon” of a powerful monopoly.
A Justice Department spokesperson told the Journal that there was nothing unusual about the behavior of agency leadership.
The federal judge’s reaction was not subtle. The DOJ’s own lead trial attorney told the court: “I only saw the term sheet when you did.” The nation’s top antitrust enforcers stood in federal court and told a judge they were kept completely in the dark about a settlement in a case they were actively prosecuting.
The judge called it “unacceptable” and said it showed “absolute disrespect for the court, for the jury, for this entire process.”
Guess who Live Nation has on retainer? Davis.
According to the Journal’s reporting, Davis earns fees across his client portfolio that can reach $300,000 a month, representing companies with billions on the line. In his own words, he told the outlet, “I know the people. I know the pressure points. I know how to win.”
Watergate didn’t begin with a break-in. It began with an antitrust thread and two lawmakers who refused to let it go. Once they pulled it, everything else followed.
When it comes to antitrust scandals inside the Trump administration, what we know so far comes from sworn depositions, court filings and investigative reporting by The Wall Street Journal, along with the ongoing analytical work of Stoller, who has been among the most precise outside observers of what’s happening inside the current DOJ.
But the bigger question is what hasn’t come out yet.
Allison Detzel contributed.
Ali and lshi is the host of “Velshi,” which airs Saturdays and Sundays on BLN. He has been awarded the National Headliner Award for Business & Consumer Reporting for “How the Wheels Came Off,” a special on the near collapse of the American auto industry. His work on disabled workers and Chicago’s red-light camera scandal in 2016 earned him two News and Documentary Emmy Award nominations, adding to a nomination in 2010 for his terrorism coverage.
Amel Ahmed
Amel Ahmed is a Segment Producer for “Velshi.”
The Senate Judiciary Committee postponed a vote on acting Attorney General Todd Blanche’s nomination, a spokesperson said late Wednesday, as two retiring Republicans on the panel dug in over President Donald Trump’s personal “anti-weaponization” deal with the government he runs.
Sen. Chuck Grassley’s decision to delay the committee vote that had been set for Thursday marks a setback for one of Trump’s highest-profile Cabinet nominees, at the hands of Texas Sen. John Cornyn and Sen. Thom Tillis of North Carolina, a pair of Republicans set to leave the chamber next year.
“Chairman Grassley works to set President Trump’s nominees up for success in committee, not failure. Senators Cornyn and Tillis want written assurances from the Department of Justice regarding the Trump-IRS settlement,” the committee spokesperson said.
Blanche’s nomination to permanently head the Department of Justice needs the support of either Cornyn or Tillis to make it out of the committee to a vote by the full Senate, assuming all Democrats remain opposed.
“Why don’t you call over the Department of Justice and tell them they have one hour and 50 minutes to get me what I asked for,” Cornyn told reporters Wednesday afternoon amid the hardening standoff over his demand that Blanche and the DOJ put in writing a commitment never to pursue the president’s prized “anti-weaponization” fund, and to clarify the terms of Trump’s personal deal with the Internal Revenue Service.
Tillis told MS NOW that the conversations were complicated by the need for the Justice Department to get “several parties” to agree on the language of the statement Cornyn and Tillis are seeking.
“What I’ve advised the chair, and I would assume Senator Cornyn said something similar, is that we’re not prepared to vote yes yet,” he added.
“The Department has been in regular communication with Committee members for weeks, and we look forward to continuing to work productively with Senators to address any concerns,” a Justice Department spokesperson said in response to the decision to postpone the committee vote.
Cornyn was set to meet with Blanche on Wednesday morning, but the meeting was called off after Blanche failed to meet the senator’s demand for written proposals to modify the controversial settlement agreement he brokered between Trump and the IRS. The Republican senator is set to leave Congress when his term ends in January after a bruising May primary loss to Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, Trump’s chosen candidate.
“Maybe John Cornyn’s upset with me because I didn’t endorse him,” Trump told reporters Wednesday afternoon in the Oval Office. “I don’t know what it is, but I haven’t heard that there’s a problem. I heard (Blanche) is going through quite nicely.”
Cornyn made clear to Blanche during his confirmation hearing that he will not get his support until he agrees to reopen and modify the settlement. Due to the committee’s narrow Republican majority, one GOP “no” vote is enough to sink Blanche’s nomination.
The senator has asked Blanche to provide proof that the proposed nearly $1.8 billion “anti-weaponization” fund established as part of the deal between Trump and the IRS is formally dead, and he has also demanded Blanche narrow the tax audit immunity provisions the settlement afforded to Trump and his family.
Blanche has publicly stated that his department has dropped the fund, but he and the DOJ have dodged requests from Cornyn and a federal judge to put that in writing.
After announcing his meeting with Blanche would not take place Wednesday morning, Cornyn told reporters that changes from Blanche “in a modified release form” would be acceptable, but that “for some reason … they simply refuse to do it,” referring to the DOJ.
Shortly after the meeting was called off, a Justice Department official told MS NOW that the department “provided a written proposal to Senator Cornyn’s staff yesterday following ongoing discussion with both the Committee and the Senator’s office.”
Cornyn said that proposal was “not responsive” to his demands because it did not address the tax audit immunity provisions in the settlement, one of his key demands.
In May, Blanche signed an addendum as part of the deal that granted Trump, his family and his businesses immunity from pending IRS tax audits. That agreement, which has been decried by former IRS officials and legal experts as unlawful self-dealing, is being contested in federal court.
Cornyn noted that Blanche testified under oath that he could meet the request during his confirmation hearing.
“Maybe they think I’m just going to give up or you know, go along, but they’re mistaken,” Cornyn said when asked why he thinks the DOJ could be slow-walking his request.
Kevin Frey contributed to this report.
Sydney Carruth is a breaking news reporter covering national politics and policy for MS NOW. You can send her tips from a non-work device on Signal at SydneyCarruth.46 or follow her work on X and Bluesky.
Mychael Schnell is a reporter for MS NOW.
Ebony Davis is a breaking news reporter for MS NOW based in Washington, D.C. She previously worked at BLN as a campaign reporter covering elections and politics.
When Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu arrived this week for his tour of Washington, he may have had a mission in mind.
Netanyahu needed to overcome his newly diminished stature and waning influence over his once close friend President Donald Trump as both leaders grapple with the unpopularity of a war they started together and is escaping their control.
His meeting at the White House with Trump on Tuesday, which was closed to the press, was the first face-to-face encounter between the two allies since the U.S. and Israel launched a joint attack against Iran on Feb. 28.
Trump gave him a muted welcome and afterwards simply described the meeting as “very good.” “Obviously, many important subjects were discussed,” the president wrote on Truth Social.
Rather than an intimate one-on-one setting, the Oval Office was full of top U.S. officials — Vice President JD Vance, Secretary of State Marco Rubio, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Dan Caine, and special envoy Steve Witkoff.
But Netanyahu continued the full court press on the Trump administration.
Over the course of two days, in addition to seeing Trump and attending Sen. Lindsey Graham’s funeral at the Capitol, Netanyahu also met separately with Vance, Hegseth, and Rubio, White House and Israeli officials confirmed to MS NOW.
The Israeli prime minister’s slate of meetings with key U.S. national security officials comes at a pivotal moment in the Iran conflict as tensions escalate in the region and Americans increasingly sour on the war. A recent Quinnipiac poll shows 60% of American voters opposing U.S. military action against Iran and 74% against sending U.S. ground troops into Iran.
Not only does Trump face pressure as Republicans face an uphill battle to retain congressional control in this fall’s midterms, Netanyahu’s fate as prime minister is at stake in Israel’s upcoming September elections – and he can’t afford to lose Trump’s favor.
The talks largely focused on what to do next as Iran continues to menace shipping in the Strait of Hormuz and retaliate against American bases in the region and launch attacks on Gulf allies.
According to a senior Israeli official who was granted anonymity to describe the closed-door meeting, President Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu did not come to a final decision after discussing three paths forward: get a “good deal” focused on Iran’s nuclear program and enriched material, have no deal and instead continue the blockade and economic pressure, or take escalated military action.
But Netanyahu did not tell Trump what he should do – nor did he express a preference.
The senior Israeli official noted Netanyahu has not ruled out diplomacy – as long as it is coupled with “very strong pressures,” calling the push to dismantle Iran’s nuclear program “a contest of will and a contest of force.”
“There are ways of squeezing them and squeezing them and squeezing them and negotiating at the same time,” the official said.
Netanyahu did not present President Trump with new intelligence regarding the underground Iranian nuclear facility Pickaxe Mountain, per the senior Israeli official, noting the U.S. and Israel already are constantly sharing intelligence – and know where Iran’s highly enriched material is. “We don’t think it’s moved, and I think we have a pretty good grasp on that,” the official said.
During their meeting on Tuesday, Trump and Netanyahu discussed ways Israel and the U.S. can work together to stop Iran’s nuclear program and get the Strait of Hormuz open to maritime trade, the senior Israeli official said.
The two leaders also discussed a third goal: to continue to undermine the Iranian regime and “possibly create future conditions for a change in that area.” U.S. officials have backed away from pursuing paths that would overthrow the current leadership, but Netanyahu still believes that could happen.
“The chasm that has been created between the people and the regime is not about to be closed,” the senior Israeli official said of Netanyahu’s thinking.
Netanyahu advised Trump in February that Israeli intelligence indicated launching strikes against Iran would lead to the toppling of the Islamic Republic’s regime – and five months later, the slain ayatollah’s son retains power with a close circle of hardliners, calling into question the accuracy of Israel’s intelligence apparatus.
But the senior Israeli official said at the time, Netanyahu did not promise the Iranian people would take fate into their own hands following a coordinated attack. Rather, he chose his words carefully and said that an attack could create conditions to “advance the probability or the possibility that that would happen.”
The conditions needed for the Iranian regime to fall, “did not materialize,” the official told MS NOW, adding, “not for lack of insight, but for either operational failure or decisions that were made.”
Despite Netanyahu insisting Israel and the U.S. are on the same page, differences still remain: the sale of F-35 fighter jets to Turkey and the Saudi nuclear arrangement did not come up during Wednesday’s White House meeting, according to a second Israeli official granted anonymity to describe sensitive discussions.
Meanwhile, the conflict continues to spread, with an Iranian drone attacking a U.S. gas storage tanker off the coast of Egypt on Wednesday.
Trump indicated he would not let Iran’s latest action slide, telling reporters on Wednesday that the U.S. would retaliate against Iran even as he leaves room for diplomatic talks to resume.
“It’s our turn, and we’ll see if we get there with an agreement at some point,” Trump said. “But we’re going to hit them very hard.”
As for what it would take for Israel to join the U.S. strikes, the senior Israeli official said that if Israel is attacked by Iran, “We will respond very, very forcefully and very quickly. And I think Iran would make a great mistake.”
Julia Jester covers politics for MS NOW and is based in Washington, D.C.
International rage over FIFA’s close ties to President Donald Trump has reached a fever pitch after soccer’s governing body announced a plan to sell a significant stake to an investor group led by Joshua Kushner, the brother of Trump’s son-in-law.
The president and his family have all but turned the White House into their personal piggy bank. And FIFA — which has its own sordid history of corruption — seems to have made itself a party to Trump’s self-enrichment under Gianni Infantino’s leadership, such as by paying for space inside Trump Tower in New York. (The organization has defended the office rental as a World Cup outpost.)
Soccer is seen by many as a unifying game. But Trump’s incorporation of FIFA into his political dynasty is threatening that idea.
FIFA has announced plans to sell a large minority stake in a new company that will run its main events, including the World Cup and Club World Cup, as part of a plan to triple the amount of development money it dishes out to its 211 member associations.
Under the proposals — which are subject to approval by a majority of those national associations and FIFA’s 37-member council — a new entity called FIFA Forward Enterprises (FFE) will take over all commercial operations, while FIFA remains the game’s global governing body and retains a majority stake in FFE.
A press release from FIFA confirmed the plans and said Thrive Eternal, which was launched by Joshua Kushner, is expected to lead the investment group that would control FIFA Forward Enterprise. FIFA did not clarify why Thrive Eternal was selected, and Kushner was already dabbling in sports.
But Trump basically has already given son-in-law Jared Kushner carte blanche to dictate U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East while simultaneously hatching business plans in the region. (Jared Kushner has denied any conflicts of interest.)
Joshua Kushner reportedly has been a major donor to Democrats. But, predictably, the idea of another Kushner becoming financially entwined with the World Cup — the world’s most popular sporting event — and basically being dropped into a position of global significance isn’t going over well. Several other soccer governing bodies have expressed concerns, including Europe’s UEFA.
“This crosses a line that football’s governing institutions should never cross,” UEFA said in a statement about The Athletic’s report, adding: “The soul and governance of football are not assets to trade — especially with zero transparency as to who gains financially. None of us are the owners of football. It is not FIFA’s to sell.”
Democrats on the House Judiciary Committee also rebuked the plan, writing on X: “Apparently the fake Peace Prize and giant lease with Trump Tower weren’t enough — now Infantino performs a kickback hat trick by pursuing a multibillion-dollar deal with Jared Kushner’s brother to sell ownership stakes in the World Cup to private investors.”
FIFA, Donald Trump’s favorite corrupt racketeering enterprise in world sports, is now going directly into business with the Trump family!
Apparently the fake Peace Prize and giant lease with Trump Tower weren’t enough—now Infantino performs a kickback hat trick by pursuing a… https://t.co/knSZibuMea
— House Judiciary Dems (@HouseJudiciary) July 28, 2026
Rep. Jamie Raskin, D-Md., has already launched an investigation into the FIFA leader’s relationship with the Trump administration, while dozens of European lawmakers — citing concerns about “potential breaches of political neutrality” — have called for the FIFA Ethics Committee to investigate Infantino. This new proposal seems unlikely to assuage those concerns.
But what it does seem likely to do is fuel global anger toward the U.S. — the kind that has been growing since Trump retook office.
And when you consider that, it’s truly remarkable how the same MAGA movement whose members whined for years about politics mixing with sports is now in lockstep with a president who seems dead-set on casting his shadow over every sports event he can.
This post on X basically sums up the foul stench around FIFA’s latest proposal.
Sepp Blatter was Infantino’s predecessor as FIFA president and oversaw the organization amid some of its many scandals. When heof all people, is warning about how Trump and Infantino’s relationship is “deeply damaging” soccer, it’s a sign of how far FIFA has descended into the gutter.
Ja’han Jones is an MS NOW opinion blogger. He previously wrote The ReidOut Blog.
-
Politics2 years agoFormer ‘Squad’ members launching ‘Bowman and Bush’ YouTube show
-
Uncategorized2 years ago
Bob Good to step down as Freedom Caucus chair this week
-
Politics2 years agoFormer Kentucky AG Daniel Cameron launches Senate bid
-
The Dictatorship2 years agoLuigi Mangione acknowledges public support in first official statement since arrest
-
The Josh Fourrier Show2 years agoDOOMSDAY: Trump won, now what?
-
The Dictatorship2 years agoPete Hegseth’s tenure at the Pentagon goes from bad to worse
-
Politics2 years agoBlue Light News’s Editorial Director Ryan Hutchins speaks at Blue Light News’s 2025 Governors Summit
-
The Dictatorship1 year agoMike Johnson sums up the GOP’s arrogant position on military occupation with two words